Federal Judicial Clerkship Application Process

04/03/2012

The firm will host a special event for Berkeley Law students of color and recent alumni. California State Bar President and Keker & Van Nest Partner Jon Streeter will join Judges Lucy Koh and Ed Davila for a discussion about the federal judicial clerkship application process.

Elliot Peters, an attorney in San Francisco at Keker & Van Nest LLP, said four members of Armstrong’s legal team, including himself and attorney John Keker, were interviewed in December by agents from Las Vegas about allegations that members of the “investigation’s inner circle” may have leaked information about the strategy of a grand jury investigation in Los Angeles and possible charges.

MEMORANDUM DECISION ON MOTION TO VACATE ENFORCEMENT ORDERDENNIS MONTALI, Bankruptcy Judge.I. IntroductionThe City of Oakland (“City”) filed a motion (the “Motion To Vacate”) for an [ 331 B.R. 917 ]

order vacating the Order Enforcing Order Confirming PG & E’s Plan of Reorganization (the “Enforcement Order”) entered on September 3, 2004. Debtor, Pacific Gas & Electric Company (“PG & E”), opposed the Motion To Vacate. The court held a hearing on April 25, 2005, and appearances were noted on the record. During the course of that hearing the court indicated to counsel for City that its complaint in the Motion To Vacate about PG & E’s failure to serve its Omnibus Motion To Enforce Order Confirming PG & E’s Plan of Reorganization (“Motion To Enforce”) filed on July 29, 2004, was well taken and that the court would grant the Motion To Vacate as long as City could show that it had a meritorious defense to the Motion To Enforce.City was given time to submit proof that its failure to file a proof of claim based upon its cross-complaint for indemnity and contribution against PG & E in Dickinson, et al. v. PG & E, et al., Alameda County Superior Court No. 830495-5 (the “State Court Action”), was the result of excusable neglect. On May 9, 2005, City filed declarations of Barbara Parker, Latonda Simmons and a supplemental declaration of Jannie L. Wong. On May 23, 2005, PG & E filed its supplemental opposition to City’s Motion To Vacate, submitting the matter for decision.After reviewing all of the papers presented and the arguments of counsel, the court has determined that the Motion To Vacate should be denied because City has not shown excusable neglect for its failure to file a proof of claim based upon the State Court Action by the October 3, 2001, deadline for the filing of proofs of claim by governmental entities. Thus it would be unable to defeat the Motion To Enforce.II. Discussion

Sources with knowledge of the probe, speaking on condition of anonymity, maintain the multi-prong probe is rapidly expanding and encompasses broader inquiries than had been conducted up to now with “major breakthroughs” the sources described as “mind-boggling .“

TLR is closely monitoring the situation, and will continue to keep readers apprised of any developments as they become available.

U.S. Attorney Andre Birotte Jr. announced in a press release that his office ‘is closing an investigation into allegations of federal criminal conduct by members and associates of a professional bicycle racing team owned in part by Lance Armstrong.’

He didn’t disclose the reason for the decision, though Birotte has used discretion in pursing high-profile criminal cases before. Last February, his office closed an investigation of mortgage giant Countrywide Financial Corp.

Betsy Andreu, who with her husband and former Armstrong teammate, Frank, accused the cycling champion of doping, said she was shocked by Birotte’s decision.

‘Our legal system failed us,’ she said. ‘This is what happens when you have a lot of money and you can buy attorneys who have people in high places in the Department of Justice.’

Unites States v. Pokerstars, et al

Online poker companies PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker, and Absolute Poker were charged with money laundering and forfeiture. A civil case brought by the Justice Department accused the company of bank fraud, wire fraud, money laundering, and illegal gambling in operations that brought in some $3 billion from online gamblers. In court agreements (below) between the three (3) online poker companies and the U.S. Justice Department, an independent monitor will be appointed to monitor and verify that nobody is playing online poker in the U.S. for “real money.” All money paid by U.S. players to PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker, and Absolute Poker will be refunded to them, and each poker web site will have specific instructions and procedures for players on how to the get their money back for U.S. transactions.

Docket Report

STIPULATION AND ORDER: NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the United States of America, by its attorney Preet Bharara, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Jason H. Cowley, Assistant United States Attorney, of counsel, and Howard Lederer, by his attorney, Elliot Remsen Peters, Esq. of Keker & Van Nest, LLP, that: Howard Lederer shall have until March 19, 2012, to file an answer or otherwise respond to the Amended Complaint.Howard Lederer answer due 3/19/2012. (Signed by Judge Leonard B. Sand on 1/24/2012) (djc)

Google’s lawyers at Keker & Van Nest have fought like hell to keep the damning Lindholm email out of evidence, but U.S. District Judge William Alsup of San Francisco federal court has nevertheless ruled three times that the draft — whose recipients included a Google in-house lawyer — is not privileged and should stay in the public record. In November, Google took the drastic step of filing a petition for a writ of mandamus at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to reverse Alsup’s rulings.

You won’t find either side’s briefs in the scant public docket at the appeals court. But I’ve gotten hold of the mandamus petition and Oracle’s response to it. The documents suggest that the already infamous Lindholm email could end up generating important Federal Circuit precedent on the bounds of attorney-client privilege.

Google’s central argument is that Alsup and San Francisco federal magistrate Donna Ryu didn’t pay enough heed to the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1981 opinion in Upjohn v. United States, which held that privilege applies to communications about legal strategy between a corporation’s in-house lawyers and its employees. The Lindholm draft email was generated in anticipation of Oracle’s infringement suit, Google asserted, and its recipients included a Google lawyer. Google’s mandamus petition said that only by “adopting and expanding upon” a D.C. Circuit opinion called In re Sealed Case, which requires a “clear showing” that communications involve legal questions, could Alsup conclude that the email isn’t protected.

“Going far beyond the D.C. Circuit’s holding, the district court extended this ‘clear showing’ standard to all in-house lawyers because they are presumed to do more non-legal work than outside counsel,” wrote Google’s lawyers. “The district judge’s written opinion justified this approach by citing his long-held personal skepticism about privilege claims involving in-house counsel.” (Google’s brief is by Keker & Van Nest, King & Spalding, and Greenberg Traurig.)

Bar Admissions

Matthew M. Werdegar

Matt Werdegar helps clients safeguard their intellectual property. He focuses on his clients’ business objectives and crafts novel, yet pragmatic, litigation strategies to meet those objectives. In addition, Mr. Werdegar is often called upon to assist with difficult, high-stakes disputes in a variety of other areas, including professional liability, breach of contract, fraud and breach of fiduciary duty cases.

For more than a decade, Mr. Werdegar has handled complex intellectual property and civil litigation matters in state and federal courts across the country and before the International Trade Commission. During that time, he has successfully tried a variety of cases to verdict and won favorable decisions before state appellate courts and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Richmond, VA – Fighting to make public government efforts to obtain Internet users’ private information without a warrant, today the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) plan to file an appeal in the legal battle over the records of several Twitter users in connection with the government’s WikiLeaks investigation.

The ACLU and EFF represent Icelandic parliament member Birgitta Jonsdottir. The appeal, filed jointly with other Twitter users Jacob Appelbaum and Rop Gonggrijp, challenges U.S. District Judge Liam O’Grady’s November decision refusing to unseal or publicly list all orders that may have been sent to companies other than Twitter and any related motions and court orders.

“These people want to try to protect their privacy and their First Amendment rights, and the government should not be able to prevent that by hiding court records. Our courts are public. Secret court orders and secret court dockets should not be permitted, except in extraordinary circumstances,” said Aden Fine, staff attorney with the ACLU Speech, Privacy and Technology Project. “This case is just one example of the unfortunate recent trend to make our court processes less open and transparent.”

In light of the district court’s denial of a stay, Jonsdottir and the other Twitter users involved in the case did not appeal the judge’s decision requiring Twitter to turn over their records.

Attorneys for Jonsdottir are Fine of the ACLU, Rebecca Glenberg of the ACLU of Virginia and Cindy Cohn, Lee Tien and Marcia Hofmann of EFF. The motions were joined by attorneys from the law firm Keker & Van Nest LLP and the Law Office of John D. Cline on behalf of Jacob Appelbaum and Rop Gonggrijp, respectively, as well as local counsel in Virginia.

Please observe that, rather than contacting Keker & Van Nest’s Jon Streeter, Lewis Brisbois’s Craig Holden, and State Bar of California’s Patricia Lee directly , the query is being delivered publicly, here and now. Any opinion or observation can be sent to lesliebrodie@gmx.com

What’s more, many of Leahy’s most generous contributors are major supporters of PIPA. In fact, the five groups that have donated most to Leahy from 2007 to 2012 all are lobbying for passage of the legislation. They include Technet ($81,961), a group promoting innovation and technology; Girardi/Keese ($72,000), a large California law firm that specializes in intellectual property litigation; Time Warner ($62,150), the U.S. media giant that owns Warner Bros. movie studio; Walt Disney Co. ($45,150), the Hollywood film maker; and Vivendi ($36,706), an international media conglomerate that produces films and music.

Jessica Tavares, 62, ex-chairwoman of the United Auburn Indian Community – owner of Thunder Valley casino resort – was among seven members banned from tribal property. Six lost their $30,000-plus monthly casino dividends. The tribal council said the group had violated tribal slander laws, but Tavares accuses attorney Howard Dickstein of engineering their ouster, saying, “He’s the puppeteer.”

Howard Dickstein, 67, at his Sacramento law office filled with modern art, offers no apologies for the wealth he’s amassed from representing California Indian tribes, saying tribal members “know what I stand for and know what my fees are. … I am what I am. I am my own person. Some people like it and some people don’t.”

Keker & Van Nest’s Jan Little is one of fourteen finalists for the prestigious Chambers & Partners Litigator of the Year Award, TLR has learned.

Ms Jan Little (photo: courtesy)

Little, who has handled high-stakes criminal and complex civil litigation for more than 25 years, was previously recognized as one of the “Best Lawyers In America” for bet-the-company litigation, commercial litigation and white collar criminal defense according to her firm.

She joined Keker & Van Nest in 1986 and elevated to partnership in 1988. Previously, Little served as trial attorney in the Public Integrity Section of the U.S. Department of Justice Criminal Division (1982-86), and as a law clerk to the Hon. William W. Schwarzer in the Northern District of California (1981-82). She is a 1981 graduate of Yale Law School.

The final selection will be announced at the February 2012 Women in Law Awards Dinner.

As a service to the community, The Leslie Brodie Report shall publish a communication recently delivered to McGeorge School of Law Dean Elizabeth Rindskopf Parker, below:

“In that a former employee (Sarah Redfield) of McGeorge School of Law engaged, and continues to engage, in fraud and misrepresentation, and as civil litigation appears unavoidable, I ask that you arrange for McGeorge to contact me with the precise dates (day, month, and year) of Professor Redfield’s employment with the school in order to allow me to ascertain potential legal liability, if at all, on the part of McGeorge.

Ms Ginger Bredemeier (right), from May 2007 to May 2008 was employed at CalPERS as Administrative Assistant, Diversity Outreach Program. From May 2008 to August 2009 she was a “Writing Projects Manager – Human Resources and Grant Projects” at CaliforniaALL. Ms. Bredemeier was elected President of the National Asian Pacific American Law Student Association (NAPALSA) while a law student at McGeorge, and is seen here with Ms Holly Fujie (image: courtesy photo)

As things currently stand, preliminary and ongoing research shows that while Redfield was employed at McGeorge, she conspired with others to create a charitable entity that would serve as a vehicle to misappropriate close to $800,000 from the Foundation of the State Bar of California, and otherwise engage in other unlawful and deceitful conduct.

While I am still presently struggling to unravel the entire scheme known as CaliforniaALL, liability on the part of Redfield (and, vicariously, on the part of McGeorge) is clear and supported by overwhelming evidence sufficient to potentially allege multiple causes of actions (such as negligent supervision, civil conspiracy, fraud, Civil-RICO, and violation of the UCL) against McGeorge and Redfield’s current employer in a California court given that jurisdiction exists due to Redfield’s membership in the State Bar of California, Council on Access and Fairness.

As you recall, you extended an invitation of employment to Redfield which lasted approximately 5 years. One of Redfield’s job duties was to engage the community in different projects to promote diversity, such as Pacific Pathways and others. You also were an active participant in Redfield’s other projects, such as the Wingspread series. As such, McGeorge will be hard-pressed to claim that any misconduct I allege against Redfield was outside the scope and course of her employment with McGeorge.

Other employees and/or former employees of McGeorge with connection to CaliforniaALL include Robert Hawley, Ruthe Ashley, Larissa Parecki, and Gilles Attia, as well as former students Sarah Attia and Ginger Breadmeier.

While researching matters relating to CaliforniaALL in connection with McGeorge, I unfortunately noticed a pattern of violations and utter and complete disregard for legislation and case law prohibiting discrimination on bases such as race, national origin, and the like, under the guise of “diversity.”

As such, I ask that you and McGeorge ensure that no such violations occur any further, and that McGeorge calibrate itself to full and complete compliance with all laws, forthwith.

Note that should such compliance fail to occur within 30 days, I shall begin to explore remedies available under the law to enforce said compliance. Additionally, I ask that McGeorge — even if it believes its operation are legal — also ensure that they are fair and otherwise do not violate California’s UCL.

From my perspective, the diversity initiative is a complete and total failure as it promote mediocrity, which later manifests itself in a lack of standards and injustices. President Clinton once commented that he perceives the AIDS epidemic as a matter of national security, and likewise I perceive the diversity initiative as such.

A case in point is your confederate Ruthe Ashley. At least from my limited observations, Ashley appears to be a very energetic and warm person. However, a great lawyer she is not; perhaps this is because she, at one point after graduating from law school, was given a free pass and didn’t have to keep struggling and develop skills which would eventually have gelled to make her a better attorney. It became easier and more financially profitable to run around and scream diversity, a talent which Holly Fujie had also unfortunately acquired, despite the over-representation of APIA in all ABA-approved law-schools.

There is absolutely nothing in Ashley’s legal background, even to date, to have ever justified her position as “Vice-President of the State Bar of California.” To carry such a title, I would imagine someone whose legal career is awe inspiring, such as Pierce O’Donnell, Holly Fujie, John Keker, Jim Brosnahan, and last, but certainly not least, Elizabeth Rindskopf Parker.

Thank you for your time and your and McGeorge’s anticipated cooperation in the above matters. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to have your assistant contact me.”

These sources maintain that the inquiry involves personnel at Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, the State Bar of California, as well as a close examination of the relationship between Laura Chick and Edith Matthai of Robie & Matthai.

A source maintains that one aspect of the inquiry involves 3 sub-parts concerning the alleged:

2) circumstances surrounding the removal of Craig Holden from MGA (a client of Girardi & Keese) to Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, as well as the subsequent positioning of Holden as member of the BOG, and thanks to an endorsement by the Breakfast Club — A Los Angeles-based entity which the recruiting of candidates for the State Bar of California Board of Governors is its primary function.

3) Circumstances surrounding actions taken (or, most likely, lack thereof) by the State Bar of California against clients of the Lawyer’s Mutual Insurance Company.

3) Circumstances surrounding actions taken by the OCTC/State Bar Court/California Supreme Court in “fixing” cases against errant clients of Lawyer’s Mutual (at times via State Bar Court “Default Judgement”), as to allow Lawyer’s Mutual an opportunity to potentially argue the misconduct was “intentional”, and hence to reject coverage. Here, particular attention is given to the examining transactions surrounding Sheldon Sloan, Ronald George, Judith Epstein, Ronald Stovitz, and former-crack-addict Mike Nisperos.

TLR is closely monitoring the situation, and will continue to keep readers apprised of any developments as they become available.

Program Committee Elizabeth S. Salveson Chief Labor Attorney Office of the City Attorney City and County of San Francisco 1390 Market St. 5th fl. San Francisco, CA 94102 (415) 554-3809elizabeth.salveson@sfgov.org

Between Oct. 5, 2010 and June 30, the county has paid $615,492.70 for specialized litigation to the San Francisco-based law firm Keker and Van Nest, according to information provided by county spokesman Marshall Wilson.

Lance Armstrong’s new legal team, led by John W. Keker of San Francisco, has filed a brief alleging the government has been leaking damaging information to “60 Minutes” and others about the former bicycling champion. The court papers filed in Los Angeles late last week cite especially the role of the government’s investigator, Jeff Novitzky. The brief complaining about leaks from the federal grand jury here was apparently provided to Politico’s Mike Allen.

The Armstrong motion says: “[T]he leading government advocate for the Armstrong investigation, Novitzky, was recently connected to an investigation riddled with leaks to the same reporters involved in this case, and has a documented history of over-reaching and disregarding individual’s [sic] privacy rights. …

“A grand jury is not a vehicle to facilitate government-sponsored campaigns of character assassination. … Someone … with regular access to grand jury information is routinely flouting the law requiring grand jury secrecy. … Over the past year, purported details of a grand jury investigation relating to Armstrong and professional cycling races in Europe have been deliberately leaked to the media on dozens of occasions … The leaks have rendered what should have been a closed investigation into a field day for reporters with access to the leaks, and an easy forum for whoever seeks to damage Armstrong’s reputation. …

Thom Mrozek, public affairs officer for the U.S. attorney’s office, replied that “the government has received the motion filed late last week and the government will file its opposition brief consistent with the briefing schedule that will be set by the District Court. Therefore, we will not comment on the assertions made in the motion at this time.”

A new legal team for Lance Armstrong, who is under investigation by a federal grand jury for allegations of organized doping, is going on the offensive against his pursuers, charging in a court filing that the cycling champion has been the victim of “character assassination” through leaks and pointing the finger at government investigator Jeff Novitzky.

“Each leak has been designed to propagate public support for this investigation by smearing Armstrong and tarnishing his reputation,” says the 20-page motion, filed late Thursday in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, where the grand jury is sitting. “These circumstances are crying out for an investigation.”

The Armstrong motion says: “[T]he leading government advocate for the Armstrong investigation, Novitzky, was recently connected to an investigation riddled with leaks to the same reporters involved in this case, and has a documented history of over-reaching and disregarding individual’s [sic] privacy rights. …

DOLE TEAM — GIRARDI & KEESE’S THOMAS GIRARDI AND HOWARD MILLER TOGHETHER WITH ENGSTROM LIPSCOMB & LACK’S WALTER LACK. ALL PLAINTIFFS’ COUNSELS IN FRONT OF NINTH CIRCUIT IN THE CASE OF FRANCO VS.DOW CHEMICAL WHICH DUE TO ALLEGED FRAUD METAMORPHOSED TO THE MATTER OFIN RE GIRARDI

IN RE GIRARDI TEAM — RESPONDENT AND HIS COUNSELS IN FRONT OF NINTH CIRCUIT. PICTURED ON THE RIGHT IS MS. DIANE KARPMAN.

DURING THE MATTERS OF IN RE GIRARDI AND MATTEL vs. MGA — MR. NOLAN — DEFENDED MR. GIRARDI, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, HE WAS ALSO PART OF THE “MGA TEAM”. SAID TEAM ALSO INCLUDED KEKER & VAN NEST’S JOHN KEKER; AND BY EXTENSION, MS. JAN LITTLE — SPOUSE OF RORY LITTLE — SPECIAL PROSECUTOR IN MATTER OF IN RE GIRARDI

JUDGE WILLIAM FLETCHER AND SPECIAL PROSECUTOR RORY LITTLE IN MATTER OF IN RE GIRARDI JUDGE FLETCHER: RESPONDENTS (LACK, GIRARDI, TRIANA, TOPP) MADE THESE FALSE REPRESENTATIONS “KNOWINGLY, INTENTIONALLY AND RECKLESSLY.” “PRESISTENT USE OF KNOWN FALSEHOODS.”

RESPONDENT , RESPONDENT’S COUNSEL, AND THE PROSECUTOR —- IN PROCEEDINGS INVOLVING THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA.

STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA FOUNDATION TEAM (DBA CALIFORNIA BAR FOUNDATION) AT THE TIME HOWARD MILLER OF GIRARDI & KEESE SERVED AS PRESIDENT OF STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA.

BOG TEAM. KEKER & VAN NEST’S JON STREETER AND SKADDEN ARPS’S ALEC CHANG CURRENT MEMBERS OF THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA BOARD OF GOVERNORS. ON THE RIGHT, MR. CRAIG HOLDEN, PARTNER WITH LEWIS BRISBOIS; RECENTLY ELECTED TO THE BOG; FORMERLY, PART OF MGA TEAM.

PRESENTLY SERVES AS PRESIDENT OF CALIFORNIA BAR FOUNDATION. INTENTIONALLY AND UNLAWFULLY REFUSES TO PRODUCE FOUNDATION CONFLICT OF INTEREST FORMS SIGNED BY HIMSELF AND HOWARD MILLER.

Ron also obtained a $2.6 million settlement in a legal malpractice case against the law firm of Skadden Arps – one of the most prominent law firms in the world. Ron settled the case on the morning of the summary judgment hearings, ending a five year battle with Skadden and their attorneys Keker & Van Nest.

Toward the end of 2007, Plaintiffs Rumsey Band of Wintun Indians (now known as the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation) — represented by Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal and Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy — filed a suit in Yolo County Superior Court against Howard Dickstein and Jane Zerbi of Dickstein & Zerbi and Arlen Opper, a financial consultant, accusing them of unjustly enriching themselves with tribal money by defrauding the tribe of millions of dollars over more than a decade.

Howard Dickstein, the spouse of State Bar of California Board of Governors member Jeannine English. allegedly engaged in “a course of dealing that involved breaches of trust and violations of duties of the most basic, and, indeed, sacred kind.”

1) Do you believe Keker & Van Nest and Elliot Peters, who represented Howard Dickstein in a suit which alleged 14 causes of action which was transferred to Sacramento Superior Court, refer, truthfully, to the case of Rumsey vs. Dickstein by stating “The plaintiffs alleged our client, the plaintiff’s former attorneys, were negligent.”?

Plaintiff v. Law Firm: The plaintiffs alleged our client, the plaintiff’s former attorneys, were negligent. After we successfully transferred the case to Sacramento Superior Court and revealed key facts about the plaintiff during discovery, the case settled before trial for a small fraction of the demand.

• On May 14, 2010 , District Attorney Kamala D. Harris announced today that she has put in place a series of measures to assess cases that may be impacted by expected disclosures from the San Francisco Police Department about the misconduct of sworn officers and civilian employees.

District Attorney Harris has called on John Keker, a top criminal defense attorney, chief prosecutor in United States v. Oliver North, two-time President of the San Francisco Police Commission and founding partner of Keker and Van Nest, to advise the District Attorney’s Office in this area. Specifically, Mr. Keker will assist the District Attorney’s Office in assessing any potential impact future disclosures from the San Francisco Police Department about the misconduct and criminal history of San Francisco Police Department personnel may have on the cases which have already been adjudicated. ( Source: http://www.sfdistrictattorney.org/News.asp?id=610 )

• In late 2003, he was one of the bigwigs who signed up for her advisory committee that took shape between her election and early ’04 inauguration

Monaco — a sovereign city state on the Côte d’Azur (French Riviera). Located in Monaco is the city of Monte Carlo — widely known for its casino and the Monaco Grand Prix, a Formula One race held each year on the Circuit de Monaco. In a civil action filed against Attorney Howard Dickstein, spouse of State Bar of California BOG member Jeannine English, it was alleged Dickstein engaged in “a course of dealing that involved breaches of trust and violations of duties of the most basic, and, indeed, sacred kind.” Including, but not limited to, using the client’s plane for personal trips to the south of France, Big Sur and Grand Prix events in Monte Carlo and Montreal for which he owes the client $1.2 million. (Photo:courtesy of germanexotics.com)

With an unclear agenda, demoralized, and a looming election, the State Bar of California Board of Governors now faces the unpleasant prospect of probing one of its own.

The Leslie Brodie Report has learned the Board of Governors (“BOG”) has been asked to investigate alleged irregularities surrounding public member Jeannine English and her spouse — tribal gambling attorney Howard Dickstein.

Ms. Jeannine English, public member of the State Bar of California Board of Governors. Loyal to her name, Ms. English drives BMFQ Aston Martin. Howard Dickstein, discerning and discriminating, is a devotee of Ferraris. Ms. English was named a public member of the State Bar Board of Governors in 2006 by Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez.

In addition, the BOG was asked to inquire about a $900,000.00 cy pres award involving Girardi & Keese and the California wing of the AARP, where Ms. English serves as president. According to confidential sources, State Bar establishment was shocked by the scope and magnitude of the revelations.

The underlying events involve the Rumsey Band of Wintun Indians (“Rumsey”) which consists of 40 adult members who reside in Brooks, California. Attorney Howard Dickstein, a pioneer in tribal gambling law and the spouse of Ms. English, helped dig the tribe out of poverty. From a fledgling bingo business to what is now a thriving establishment known as “Cache Creek Casino.”

In and about 2007, and in addition to the services offered by Mr. Dickstein, Ms. Jeanine English and her company — Jeanine English & Associates — were also conducting business with Rumsey, by which lobbying and consulting services were purveyed by Ms. English.

Toward the end of 2007, Rumsey — represented by Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal and Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy — filed a suit in Yolo County Superior Court against Howard Dickstein and Jane Zerbi of Dickstein & Zerbi and Arlen Opper, a financial consultant, accusing them of unjustly enriching themselves with tribal money by defrauding the tribe of millions of dollars over more than a decade

.

Mr. Elliot Peters of Keker & Van Nest. Presently,Peters, along with partners John Keker and Jan Little (spouse of Prof. Rory Little),are in the midst of fighting a RICO suit filed by Chevron against attorney Steven Donziger. Peters also represents Lance Armstrong who demands an on-air apology from “60 Minutes.” (photo: courtesy amlawdaily.typepad.com)

In statements to the media, Howard Dickstein referred to the allegations as a “pack of lies,” while disparaging his client. Dickstein also stated that he plans to fight the suit and “fight hard.” Appearing on behalf of defendant Dickstein was Elliot Peters of Keker & Van Nest.

In addition, and according to the sources, the BOG was also asked to inquire about a plan by which a cy pres amount of $900,000 will be funneled to the AARP of California from a class action in which the law offices of Girardi & Keese serves as counsel. (Attridge v. Visa Case No. CGC-04-436920).

Jeanine English serves as the President of the AARP’s California branch, and is also involved with the AARP on a national level. According to the sources, while the sums will not go directly to Ms. English, they will indirectly benefit her vis-a-vis the associated prestige resulting from successful fund raising efforts.

Hence, the sources maintain, the lack of disclosure regarding the proposed cy pres is alarming, especially considering events relating to the State Bar’s handling of grave misconduct by Girardi & Keese in the Dole matter, and subsequent events involving Howard Rice’s Jerome Falk and Douglas Winthrop.

In the legal dispute between MGA (Bratz Dolls) and Mattel (Barbie Dolls), it is estimated that MGA’s legal cost to date are close to $200 million, meaning that to date MGA has paid $200 million to various law firms to defend the action advanced by Mattel for copyright
infringement.

According to Mattel, Bratz Dolls were designed by a former Mattel employee (Carter Bryant) before he jumped ship to MGA. Mattel sought $2 billion in damages, and according to Bob Eckert, Mattel’s CEO, pursues the case “as a matter of principle.”

Defendant Carter Bryant was represented by Keker & Van Nest’s John Keker. Los Angeles-based MGA and founder/CEO Isaac Larian were initially represented by O’Melveny & Myers. However, in 2007 a dispute erupted when O’Melveny insisted that partner Daniel Petrocelli serve as lead counsel in the case.

Mr. Larian was not thrilled about Petrocelli and fired O’Melveny altogether. O’Melveny immediately demanded payment of $10 million it claims MGA and Mr. Larian owe the firm in unpaid and outstanding legal fees.

With a looming 2008 trial date, no counsel, and a threat from O’Melveny that if he does not pay he will be sued, Mr. Larian went knocking on the door of Thomas Girardi of Girardi & Keese.

Specifically, according to an article published in The Recorder, in October 2007 MGA and Isaac Larian asked Girardi to look into the fees it had paid to O’Melveny.

According to the article, Girardi stated, “When O’Melveny couldn’t get Petrocelli in the lead chair it wanted off the case. We are taking a look at the massively large fees that happened with the O’Melveny representation. On first blush, it seems like an awful lot of money for what has been accomplished. I think the client has strong reason to have great concern.”

At approximately the same time, Girardi’s friend — Thomas Nolan of Skadden Arps — was chosen to serve as counsel for MGA and Mr. Larian instead of O’Melveny.

As reported in The Recorder, “We decided to put it all under one roof,” stated Mr. Larian, “and we decided to go with Skadden and Tom Nolan.”

Thomas Nolan, who served as Girardi’s counsel (along with Diane Karpman) in the matter of In Re Girardi, is a well-known and respected attorney. According to Mr. Girardi, Thomas Nolan “is like “Wayne Gretsky” – he doesn’t look any bigger, tougher or faster, but the next thing you know he’s scored four goals. And he’s always a gentleman.”

A six-week trial was conducted in the courtroom of federal judge Stephen Larson. On July 17, 2008 , the jury returned a verdict for Mattel. More specifically, the jury found that both MGA and Isaac Larian had interfered with Mattel’s contractual relationship with Bryant, who had been under the control of Mattel during the time he designed the Bratz Dolls.

Following the verdict, preparations were made for the second stage of the trial to set damages, which were estimated to be approximately $500 million. At the conclusion of that stage, the jury awarded $100 million to Mattel. In addition, Judge Larson issued a draconian injunction against MGA, ipso facto dissolving it.

Following the trial, Thomas Nolan quickly arranged for Howard Rice’s Jerome Falk and Douglas Winthrop to join the legal team and file an immediate emergency motion with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The Ninth Circuit subsequently reversed the entire judgment and sent the matter back to District Court where it was assigned to a different judge.

Judge Larson – the initial trial judge who had taken a harsh view of GMA and Mr. Larian had left the bench to commence his employment with Girardi & Keese.

Wayne Gretsky is a master strategist and always a gentleman. Wayne Gretzky is a former professional ice hockey player.

Categories

This story is late in publishing because the AOC (ahem, the judicial council) spent months drawing out our requests for information on a simple inquiry they should have been able to deliver on the same day it was received because what scant information they did provide was readily available to them. But they dragged out […]

More false promises of tunnels reaching out from jails to courthouses. Don’t say we didn’t tell you so because we’ve stated many times that ALL tunnel promises are false promises made to win local support of the projects and penciled out upon approval. What we find most disturbing is that Clifford Ham has a track […]

Welcome to 2017! Yeah, we know, a bit of time has passed since we’ve been hyperactive here. We’ve been a bit busy frying other fish. If you consider yourself a progressive, you’ve already read and possibly even recognized our work elsewhere. We will be continuing those projects and check in here as not to neglect […]

Thanks to the sheer incompetence of Judicial Council staff leadership, we’re going to be spending the next ten years nipping at their heels. Last week, the San Francisco trial court ruled that the Jacobs entities maintained their contractors license and that the 22.7 million that the Judicial Council should have been able to recover is […]

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, commonly referred to as the RICO Act or simply RICO, is a United States federal law that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization. The RICO Act focuses specifically on racketeering, and it allows […]